* [dpdk-dev] DPDK Release Status Meeting 3/12/2020
@ 2020-12-03 11:51 Ferruh Yigit
2020-12-07 11:54 ` oulijun
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Ferruh Yigit @ 2020-12-03 11:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: dev; +Cc: Thomas Monjalon
Meeting minutes of 3 December 2020
----------------------------------
Agenda:
* Release Dates
* 20.11 retrospective
* LTS
* OvS
* Opens
Participants:
* Arm
* Debian/Microsoft
* Intel
* Nvidia
* NXP
* Red Hat
Release Dates
-------------
* v20.11 is released on Friday, 27 November 2020
* https://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2020-November/193684.html
* https://core.dpdk.org/download/
* https://doc.dpdk.org/guides/rel_notes/release_20_11.html
* This was the biggest ever DPDK release, thanks to everyone who contributed.
* v21.02 dates
* Proposal/V1: Sunday, 20 December 2020
* -rc1: Friday, 15 January 2021
* Release: Friday, 5 February 2021
* Please send roadmaps, preferably before beginning of the release
* Thanks to NTT for sending roadmap
20.11 retrospective
-------------------
(I tried to summarize as best as I can, please free to correct/add when needed)
* What went well
* Managed to get out this very big release on time
* Was more precise with dates
* Expectations on features were more clear in this release
* Good co-working between maintainers
* Communication was better, project become more resilient
* Akhil commented last minute stress was less
* Major gcc distribution didn't cause disruption this time
* LTS is doing good job overall
* Thanks to Luca and Kevin for their work there
* Things to improve
* next-net is busy, %60+ of the commits coming from next-net,
would be good to get more help, options to improve
* Add a co-maintainer in that level
* Andrew (backup maintainer) is great candidate if he can spare time
He is already helping on reviews
* He already covered during release when Ferruh is on holiday
* Testpmd maintainership is not working fine, find maintainers for it
* Should we add more vendor trees?
* Huawei is contributing more, should it have a vendor sub-tree?
* Huawei is being good citizen mostly
* CI can be improved
* Top level Thomas/David may felt the last minute stress more this time
* Pachwork update by Jerin, to add reviewer column may help
* This seems not exactly matching patchwork intention of using delegate
field
* Need to work on how to upstream this improvement
* It is causing more problem when expectation is not clear from vendors
* Security issues
* They didn't work very well, the busy release is affecting it
* Good thing is there is a well defined process, needs resource to execute
* Can help to allocate separate resource for it
* A technical project manager can do it, doesn't have to be developer
LTS
---
* v19.11.6-rc1 is out, please test
* http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/20201203093856.299103-1-luca.boccassi@gmail.com/
* Target release date is 17 December
* v18.11.10 work is going on
* waiting for backports, request emails sent
* -rc1 is planned before holidays
OvS
---
* Second version of patch to switch DPDK 20.11 is sent, please review
Opens
-----
* Asaf shared a draft release process documentation
* It will be sent as documentation patch for community review,
after initial review
DPDK Release Status Meetings
============================
The DPDK Release Status Meeting is intended for DPDK Committers to discuss the
status of the master tree and sub-trees, and for project managers to track
progress or milestone dates.
The meeting occurs on every Thursdays at 8:30 UTC. on https://meet.jit.si/DPDK
If you wish to attend just send an email to
"John McNamara <john.mcnamara@intel.com>" for the invite.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-dev] DPDK Release Status Meeting 3/12/2020
2020-12-03 11:51 [dpdk-dev] DPDK Release Status Meeting 3/12/2020 Ferruh Yigit
@ 2020-12-07 11:54 ` oulijun
2020-12-07 12:31 ` Ferruh Yigit
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: oulijun @ 2020-12-07 11:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: dev
在 2020/12/3 19:51, Ferruh Yigit 写道:
> Meeting minutes of 3 December 2020
> ----------------------------------
>
> Agenda:
> * Release Dates
> * 20.11 retrospective
> * LTS
> * OvS
> * Opens
>
> Participants:
> * Arm
> * Debian/Microsoft
> * Intel
> * Nvidia
> * NXP
> * Red Hat
>
>
> Release Dates
> -------------
>
> * v20.11 is released on Friday, 27 November 2020
> * https://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2020-November/193684.html
> * https://core.dpdk.org/download/
> * https://doc.dpdk.org/guides/rel_notes/release_20_11.html
>
> * This was the biggest ever DPDK release, thanks to everyone who
> contributed.
>
> * v21.02 dates
> * Proposal/V1: Sunday, 20 December 2020
> * -rc1: Friday, 15 January 2021
> * Release: Friday, 5 February 2021
>
> * Please send roadmaps, preferably before beginning of the release
> * Thanks to NTT for sending roadmap
>
Hi， Ferruh Yigit
We plan to send the roadmap, but we're not sure what it requires? Is
it per vendor or per PMD vendor? What should he contain?
Thanks
Lijun Ou
>
> 20.11 retrospective
> -------------------
>
> (I tried to summarize as best as I can, please free to correct/add when
> needed)
>
> * What went well
> * Managed to get out this very big release on time
> * Was more precise with dates
> * Expectations on features were more clear in this release
> * Good co-working between maintainers
> * Communication was better, project become more resilient
> * Akhil commented last minute stress was less
> * Major gcc distribution didn't cause disruption this time
> * LTS is doing good job overall
> * Thanks to Luca and Kevin for their work there
>
> * Things to improve
> * next-net is busy, %60+ of the commits coming from next-net,
> would be good to get more help, options to improve
> * Add a co-maintainer in that level
> * Andrew (backup maintainer) is great candidate if he can spare time
> He is already helping on reviews
> * He already covered during release when Ferruh is on holiday
> * Testpmd maintainership is not working fine, find maintainers for it
> * Should we add more vendor trees?
> * Huawei is contributing more, should it have a vendor sub-tree?
> * Huawei is being good citizen mostly
> * CI can be improved
> * Top level Thomas/David may felt the last minute stress more this time
> * Pachwork update by Jerin, to add reviewer column may help
> * This seems not exactly matching patchwork intention of using
> delegate
> field
> * Need to work on how to upstream this improvement
> * It is causing more problem when expectation is not clear from
> vendors
> * Security issues
> * They didn't work very well, the busy release is affecting it
> * Good thing is there is a well defined process, needs resource
> to execute
> * Can help to allocate separate resource for it
> * A technical project manager can do it, doesn't have to be
> developer
>
>
> LTS
> ---
>
> * v19.11.6-rc1 is out, please test
> *
> http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/20201203093856.299103-1-luca.boccassi@gmail.com/
> * Target release date is 17 December
>
> * v18.11.10 work is going on
> * waiting for backports, request emails sent
> * -rc1 is planned before holidays
>
>
> OvS
> ---
>
> * Second version of patch to switch DPDK 20.11 is sent, please review
>
>
> Opens
> -----
>
> * Asaf shared a draft release process documentation
> * It will be sent as documentation patch for community review,
> after initial review
>
>
>
> DPDK Release Status Meetings
> ============================
>
> The DPDK Release Status Meeting is intended for DPDK Committers to
> discuss the
> status of the master tree and sub-trees, and for project managers to track
> progress or milestone dates.
>
> The meeting occurs on every Thursdays at 8:30 UTC. on
> https://meet.jit.si/DPDK
>
> If you wish to attend just send an email to
> "John McNamara <john.mcnamara@intel.com>" for the invite.
> .
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-dev] DPDK Release Status Meeting 3/12/2020
2020-12-07 11:54 ` oulijun
@ 2020-12-07 12:31 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-12-07 13:03 ` oulijun
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Ferruh Yigit @ 2020-12-07 12:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: oulijun, dev
On 12/7/2020 11:54 AM, oulijun wrote:
>
>
> 在 2020/12/3 19:51, Ferruh Yigit 写道:
>> Meeting minutes of 3 December 2020
>> ----------------------------------
>>
>> Agenda:
>> * Release Dates
>> * 20.11 retrospective
>> * LTS
>> * OvS
>> * Opens
>>
>> Participants:
>> * Arm
>> * Debian/Microsoft
>> * Intel
>> * Nvidia
>> * NXP
>> * Red Hat
>>
>>
>> Release Dates
>> -------------
>>
>> * v20.11 is released on Friday, 27 November 2020
>> * https://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2020-November/193684.html
>> * https://core.dpdk.org/download/
>> * https://doc.dpdk.org/guides/rel_notes/release_20_11.html
>>
>> * This was the biggest ever DPDK release, thanks to everyone who contributed.
>>
>> * v21.02 dates
>> * Proposal/V1: Sunday, 20 December 2020
>> * -rc1: Friday, 15 January 2021
>> * Release: Friday, 5 February 2021
>>
>> * Please send roadmaps, preferably before beginning of the release
>> * Thanks to NTT for sending roadmap
>>
> Hi， Ferruh Yigit
> We plan to send the roadmap, but we're not sure what it requires? Is it per
> vendor or per PMD vendor? What should he contain?
>
There is no strict formatting for it, the intention is to document the work
planned for the coming release, it is sent per vendor mostly. Following are the
past a few ones you can check as samples:
arm:
http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/DBAPR08MB58147BA5F6A1D90B702592C498240@DBAPR08MB5814.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com/
broadcom:
http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/CACZ4nhvDnB49YK_4SMH=BDAoRntgXxyW4kjpcpdqwHuGpwwOGg@mail.gmail.com/
nvidia:
http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/DM5PR12MB2406E0A8CC7C6E884B770B02CD560@DM5PR12MB2406.namprd12.prod.outlook.com/
marvell:
http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/BYAPR18MB2424F954434930AEF34CBD0AC8590@BYAPR18MB2424.namprd18.prod.outlook.com/
intel: http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/20200612135804.3781756-1-ferruh.yigit@intel.com/
> Thanks
> Lijun Ou
>>
>> 20.11 retrospective
>> -------------------
>>
>> (I tried to summarize as best as I can, please free to correct/add when needed)
>>
>> * What went well
>> * Managed to get out this very big release on time
>> * Was more precise with dates
>> * Expectations on features were more clear in this release
>> * Good co-working between maintainers
>> * Communication was better, project become more resilient
>> * Akhil commented last minute stress was less
>> * Major gcc distribution didn't cause disruption this time
>> * LTS is doing good job overall
>> * Thanks to Luca and Kevin for their work there
>>
>> * Things to improve
>> * next-net is busy, %60+ of the commits coming from next-net,
>> would be good to get more help, options to improve
>> * Add a co-maintainer in that level
>> * Andrew (backup maintainer) is great candidate if he can spare time
>> He is already helping on reviews
>> * He already covered during release when Ferruh is on holiday
>> * Testpmd maintainership is not working fine, find maintainers for it
>> * Should we add more vendor trees?
>> * Huawei is contributing more, should it have a vendor sub-tree?
>> * Huawei is being good citizen mostly
>> * CI can be improved
>> * Top level Thomas/David may felt the last minute stress more this time
>> * Pachwork update by Jerin, to add reviewer column may help
>> * This seems not exactly matching patchwork intention of using delegate
>> field
>> * Need to work on how to upstream this improvement
>> * It is causing more problem when expectation is not clear from vendors
>> * Security issues
>> * They didn't work very well, the busy release is affecting it
>> * Good thing is there is a well defined process, needs resource to execute
>> * Can help to allocate separate resource for it
>> * A technical project manager can do it, doesn't have to be developer
>>
>>
>> LTS
>> ---
>>
>> * v19.11.6-rc1 is out, please test
>> * http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/20201203093856.299103-1-luca.boccassi@gmail.com/
>> * Target release date is 17 December
>>
>> * v18.11.10 work is going on
>> * waiting for backports, request emails sent
>> * -rc1 is planned before holidays
>>
>>
>> OvS
>> ---
>>
>> * Second version of patch to switch DPDK 20.11 is sent, please review
>>
>>
>> Opens
>> -----
>>
>> * Asaf shared a draft release process documentation
>> * It will be sent as documentation patch for community review,
>> after initial review
>>
>>
>>
>> DPDK Release Status Meetings
>> ============================
>>
>> The DPDK Release Status Meeting is intended for DPDK Committers to discuss the
>> status of the master tree and sub-trees, and for project managers to track
>> progress or milestone dates.
>>
>> The meeting occurs on every Thursdays at 8:30 UTC. on https://meet.jit.si/DPDK
>>
>> If you wish to attend just send an email to
>> "John McNamara <john.mcnamara@intel.com>" for the invite.
>> .
>>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-dev] DPDK Release Status Meeting 3/12/2020
2020-12-07 12:31 ` Ferruh Yigit
@ 2020-12-07 13:03 ` oulijun
2020-12-07 13:59 ` Ferruh Yigit
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: oulijun @ 2020-12-07 13:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ferruh Yigit, dev
在 2020/12/7 20:31, Ferruh Yigit 写道:
> On 12/7/2020 11:54 AM, oulijun wrote:
>>
>>
>> 在 2020/12/3 19:51, Ferruh Yigit 写道:
>>> Meeting minutes of 3 December 2020
>>> ----------------------------------
>>>
>>> Agenda:
>>> * Release Dates
>>> * 20.11 retrospective
>>> * LTS
>>> * OvS
>>> * Opens
>>>
>>> Participants:
>>> * Arm
>>> * Debian/Microsoft
>>> * Intel
>>> * Nvidia
>>> * NXP
>>> * Red Hat
>>>
>>>
>>> Release Dates
>>> -------------
>>>
>>> * v20.11 is released on Friday, 27 November 2020
>>> * https://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2020-November/193684.html
>>> * https://core.dpdk.org/download/
>>> * https://doc.dpdk.org/guides/rel_notes/release_20_11.html
>>>
>>> * This was the biggest ever DPDK release, thanks to everyone who
>>> contributed.
>>>
>>> * v21.02 dates
>>> * Proposal/V1: Sunday, 20 December 2020
>>> * -rc1: Friday, 15 January 2021
>>> * Release: Friday, 5 February 2021
>>>
>>> * Please send roadmaps, preferably before beginning of the release
>>> * Thanks to NTT for sending roadmap
>>>
>> Hi， Ferruh Yigit
>> We plan to send the roadmap, but we're not sure what it requires?
>> Is it per vendor or per PMD vendor? What should he contain?
>>
>
> There is no strict formatting for it, the intention is to document the
> work planned for the coming release, it is sent per vendor mostly.
> Following are the past a few ones you can check as samples:
>
> arm:
> http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/DBAPR08MB58147BA5F6A1D90B702592C498240@DBAPR08MB5814.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com/
>
> broadcom:
> http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/CACZ4nhvDnB49YK_4SMH=BDAoRntgXxyW4kjpcpdqwHuGpwwOGg@mail.gmail.com/
>
> nvidia:
> http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/DM5PR12MB2406E0A8CC7C6E884B770B02CD560@DM5PR12MB2406.namprd12.prod.outlook.com/
>
> marvell:
> http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/BYAPR18MB2424F954434930AEF34CBD0AC8590@BYAPR18MB2424.namprd18.prod.outlook.com/
>
> intel:
> http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/20200612135804.3781756-1-ferruh.yigit@intel.com/
>
>
Hi,
Firstly, thank you for your response. As a new PMD developer and
maintainer, I am probably understand.
In addition, I would like to know that if we do not develop and push
our features in a timely manner according to the roadmap, this will not
affect you and others, or we develop and push redundant features in the
roadmap.
Thanks
Lijun Ou
>> Thanks
>> Lijun Ou
>>>
>>> 20.11 retrospective
>>> -------------------
>>>
>>> (I tried to summarize as best as I can, please free to correct/add
>>> when needed)
>>>
>>> * What went well
>>> * Managed to get out this very big release on time
>>> * Was more precise with dates
>>> * Expectations on features were more clear in this release
>>> * Good co-working between maintainers
>>> * Communication was better, project become more resilient
>>> * Akhil commented last minute stress was less
>>> * Major gcc distribution didn't cause disruption this time
>>> * LTS is doing good job overall
>>> * Thanks to Luca and Kevin for their work there
>>>
>>> * Things to improve
>>> * next-net is busy, %60+ of the commits coming from next-net,
>>> would be good to get more help, options to improve
>>> * Add a co-maintainer in that level
>>> * Andrew (backup maintainer) is great candidate if he can
>>> spare time
>>> He is already helping on reviews
>>> * He already covered during release when Ferruh is on holiday
>>> * Testpmd maintainership is not working fine, find maintainers
>>> for it
>>> * Should we add more vendor trees?
>>> * Huawei is contributing more, should it have a vendor sub-tree?
>>> * Huawei is being good citizen mostly
>>> * CI can be improved
>>> * Top level Thomas/David may felt the last minute stress more this
>>> time
>>> * Pachwork update by Jerin, to add reviewer column may help
>>> * This seems not exactly matching patchwork intention of using
>>> delegate
>>> field
>>> * Need to work on how to upstream this improvement
>>> * It is causing more problem when expectation is not clear from
>>> vendors
>>> * Security issues
>>> * They didn't work very well, the busy release is affecting it
>>> * Good thing is there is a well defined process, needs
>>> resource to execute
>>> * Can help to allocate separate resource for it
>>> * A technical project manager can do it, doesn't have to be
>>> developer
>>>
>>>
>>> LTS
>>> ---
>>>
>>> * v19.11.6-rc1 is out, please test
>>> *
>>> http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/20201203093856.299103-1-luca.boccassi@gmail.com/
>>>
>>> * Target release date is 17 December
>>>
>>> * v18.11.10 work is going on
>>> * waiting for backports, request emails sent
>>> * -rc1 is planned before holidays
>>>
>>>
>>> OvS
>>> ---
>>>
>>> * Second version of patch to switch DPDK 20.11 is sent, please review
>>>
>>>
>>> Opens
>>> -----
>>>
>>> * Asaf shared a draft release process documentation
>>> * It will be sent as documentation patch for community review,
>>> after initial review
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> DPDK Release Status Meetings
>>> ============================
>>>
>>> The DPDK Release Status Meeting is intended for DPDK Committers to
>>> discuss the
>>> status of the master tree and sub-trees, and for project managers to
>>> track
>>> progress or milestone dates.
>>>
>>> The meeting occurs on every Thursdays at 8:30 UTC. on
>>> https://meet.jit.si/DPDK
>>>
>>> If you wish to attend just send an email to
>>> "John McNamara <john.mcnamara@intel.com>" for the invite.
>>> .
>>>
>
> .
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-dev] DPDK Release Status Meeting 3/12/2020
2020-12-07 13:03 ` oulijun
@ 2020-12-07 13:59 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-12-07 14:48 ` oulijun
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Ferruh Yigit @ 2020-12-07 13:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: oulijun, dev; +Cc: Thomas Monjalon, David Marchand
On 12/7/2020 1:03 PM, oulijun wrote:
>
>
> 在 2020/12/7 20:31, Ferruh Yigit 写道:
>> On 12/7/2020 11:54 AM, oulijun wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> 在 2020/12/3 19:51, Ferruh Yigit 写道:
>>>> Meeting minutes of 3 December 2020
>>>> ----------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> Agenda:
>>>> * Release Dates
>>>> * 20.11 retrospective
>>>> * LTS
>>>> * OvS
>>>> * Opens
>>>>
>>>> Participants:
>>>> * Arm
>>>> * Debian/Microsoft
>>>> * Intel
>>>> * Nvidia
>>>> * NXP
>>>> * Red Hat
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Release Dates
>>>> -------------
>>>>
>>>> * v20.11 is released on Friday, 27 November 2020
>>>> * https://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2020-November/193684.html
>>>> * https://core.dpdk.org/download/
>>>> * https://doc.dpdk.org/guides/rel_notes/release_20_11.html
>>>>
>>>> * This was the biggest ever DPDK release, thanks to everyone who
>>>> contributed.
>>>>
>>>> * v21.02 dates
>>>> * Proposal/V1: Sunday, 20 December 2020
>>>> * -rc1: Friday, 15 January 2021
>>>> * Release: Friday, 5 February 2021
>>>>
>>>> * Please send roadmaps, preferably before beginning of the release
>>>> * Thanks to NTT for sending roadmap
>>>>
>>> Hi， Ferruh Yigit
>>> We plan to send the roadmap, but we're not sure what it requires? Is it
>>> per vendor or per PMD vendor? What should he contain?
>>>
>>
>> There is no strict formatting for it, the intention is to document the work
>> planned for the coming release, it is sent per vendor mostly. Following are
>> the past a few ones you can check as samples:
>>
>> arm:
>> http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/DBAPR08MB58147BA5F6A1D90B702592C498240@DBAPR08MB5814.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com/
>>
>> broadcom:
>> http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/CACZ4nhvDnB49YK_4SMH=BDAoRntgXxyW4kjpcpdqwHuGpwwOGg@mail.gmail.com/
>>
>> nvidia:
>> http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/DM5PR12MB2406E0A8CC7C6E884B770B02CD560@DM5PR12MB2406.namprd12.prod.outlook.com/
>>
>> marvell:
>> http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/BYAPR18MB2424F954434930AEF34CBD0AC8590@BYAPR18MB2424.namprd18.prod.outlook.com/
>>
>> intel: http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/20200612135804.3781756-1-ferruh.yigit@intel.com/
>>
>>
> Hi,
> Firstly, thank you for your response. As a new PMD developer and maintainer,
> I am probably understand.
> In addition, I would like to know that if we do not develop and push our
> features in a timely manner according to the roadmap, this will not affect you
> and others, or we develop and push redundant features in the roadmap.
>
The note at the beginning of the roadmap page is to answer this :)
https://core.dpdk.org/roadmap/
"This is not a commitment but plan of work."
The roadmap is to announce tasks under development, so enables interested
parties to collaborate.
Also helps to roughly seize the size of the release and workload, to help planning.
So not able to develop an announced feature is not a problem, but in other way
around to not announce a feature in the roadmap but try to upstream it may cause
that feature get less priority.
> Thanks
> Lijun Ou
>>> Thanks
>>> Lijun Ou
>>>>
>>>> 20.11 retrospective
>>>> -------------------
>>>>
>>>> (I tried to summarize as best as I can, please free to correct/add when needed)
>>>>
>>>> * What went well
>>>> * Managed to get out this very big release on time
>>>> * Was more precise with dates
>>>> * Expectations on features were more clear in this release
>>>> * Good co-working between maintainers
>>>> * Communication was better, project become more resilient
>>>> * Akhil commented last minute stress was less
>>>> * Major gcc distribution didn't cause disruption this time
>>>> * LTS is doing good job overall
>>>> * Thanks to Luca and Kevin for their work there
>>>>
>>>> * Things to improve
>>>> * next-net is busy, %60+ of the commits coming from next-net,
>>>> would be good to get more help, options to improve
>>>> * Add a co-maintainer in that level
>>>> * Andrew (backup maintainer) is great candidate if he can spare time
>>>> He is already helping on reviews
>>>> * He already covered during release when Ferruh is on holiday
>>>> * Testpmd maintainership is not working fine, find maintainers for it
>>>> * Should we add more vendor trees?
>>>> * Huawei is contributing more, should it have a vendor sub-tree?
>>>> * Huawei is being good citizen mostly
>>>> * CI can be improved
>>>> * Top level Thomas/David may felt the last minute stress more this time
>>>> * Pachwork update by Jerin, to add reviewer column may help
>>>> * This seems not exactly matching patchwork intention of using delegate
>>>> field
>>>> * Need to work on how to upstream this improvement
>>>> * It is causing more problem when expectation is not clear from vendors
>>>> * Security issues
>>>> * They didn't work very well, the busy release is affecting it
>>>> * Good thing is there is a well defined process, needs resource to
>>>> execute
>>>> * Can help to allocate separate resource for it
>>>> * A technical project manager can do it, doesn't have to be developer
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> LTS
>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> * v19.11.6-rc1 is out, please test
>>>> * http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/20201203093856.299103-1-luca.boccassi@gmail.com/
>>>> * Target release date is 17 December
>>>>
>>>> * v18.11.10 work is going on
>>>> * waiting for backports, request emails sent
>>>> * -rc1 is planned before holidays
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> OvS
>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> * Second version of patch to switch DPDK 20.11 is sent, please review
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Opens
>>>> -----
>>>>
>>>> * Asaf shared a draft release process documentation
>>>> * It will be sent as documentation patch for community review,
>>>> after initial review
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> DPDK Release Status Meetings
>>>> ============================
>>>>
>>>> The DPDK Release Status Meeting is intended for DPDK Committers to discuss the
>>>> status of the master tree and sub-trees, and for project managers to track
>>>> progress or milestone dates.
>>>>
>>>> The meeting occurs on every Thursdays at 8:30 UTC. on https://meet.jit.si/DPDK
>>>>
>>>> If you wish to attend just send an email to
>>>> "John McNamara <john.mcnamara@intel.com>" for the invite.
>>>> .
>>>>
>>
>> .
>>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-dev] DPDK Release Status Meeting 3/12/2020
2020-12-07 13:59 ` Ferruh Yigit
@ 2020-12-07 14:48 ` oulijun
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: oulijun @ 2020-12-07 14:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ferruh Yigit, dev; +Cc: Thomas Monjalon, David Marchand
在 2020/12/7 21:59, Ferruh Yigit 写道:
> On 12/7/2020 1:03 PM, oulijun wrote:
>>
>>
>> 在 2020/12/7 20:31, Ferruh Yigit 写道:
>>> On 12/7/2020 11:54 AM, oulijun wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 在 2020/12/3 19:51, Ferruh Yigit 写道:
>>>>> Meeting minutes of 3 December 2020
>>>>> ----------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> Agenda:
>>>>> * Release Dates
>>>>> * 20.11 retrospective
>>>>> * LTS
>>>>> * OvS
>>>>> * Opens
>>>>>
>>>>> Participants:
>>>>> * Arm
>>>>> * Debian/Microsoft
>>>>> * Intel
>>>>> * Nvidia
>>>>> * NXP
>>>>> * Red Hat
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Release Dates
>>>>> -------------
>>>>>
>>>>> * v20.11 is released on Friday, 27 November 2020
>>>>> * https://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2020-November/193684.html
>>>>> * https://core.dpdk.org/download/
>>>>> * https://doc.dpdk.org/guides/rel_notes/release_20_11.html
>>>>>
>>>>> * This was the biggest ever DPDK release, thanks to everyone who
>>>>> contributed.
>>>>>
>>>>> * v21.02 dates
>>>>> * Proposal/V1: Sunday, 20 December 2020
>>>>> * -rc1: Friday, 15 January 2021
>>>>> * Release: Friday, 5 February 2021
>>>>>
>>>>> * Please send roadmaps, preferably before beginning of the release
>>>>> * Thanks to NTT for sending roadmap
>>>>>
>>>> Hi， Ferruh Yigit
>>>> We plan to send the roadmap, but we're not sure what it requires?
>>>> Is it per vendor or per PMD vendor? What should he contain?
>>>>
>>>
>>> There is no strict formatting for it, the intention is to document
>>> the work planned for the coming release, it is sent per vendor
>>> mostly. Following are the past a few ones you can check as samples:
>>>
>>> arm:
>>> http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/DBAPR08MB58147BA5F6A1D90B702592C498240@DBAPR08MB5814.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com/
>>>
>>> broadcom:
>>> http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/CACZ4nhvDnB49YK_4SMH=BDAoRntgXxyW4kjpcpdqwHuGpwwOGg@mail.gmail.com/
>>>
>>> nvidia:
>>> http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/DM5PR12MB2406E0A8CC7C6E884B770B02CD560@DM5PR12MB2406.namprd12.prod.outlook.com/
>>>
>>> marvell:
>>> http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/BYAPR18MB2424F954434930AEF34CBD0AC8590@BYAPR18MB2424.namprd18.prod.outlook.com/
>>>
>>> intel:
>>> http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/20200612135804.3781756-1-ferruh.yigit@intel.com/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Hi,
>> Firstly, thank you for your response. As a new PMD developer and
>> maintainer, I am probably understand.
>> In addition, I would like to know that if we do not develop and
>> push our features in a timely manner according to the roadmap, this
>> will not affect you and others, or we develop and push redundant
>> features in the roadmap.
>>
>
> The note at the beginning of the roadmap page is to answer this :)
> https://core.dpdk.org/roadmap/
>
> "This is not a commitment but plan of work."
>
> The roadmap is to announce tasks under development, so enables
> interested parties to collaborate.
> Also helps to roughly seize the size of the release and workload, to
> help planning.
>
> So not able to develop an announced feature is not a problem, but in
> other way around to not announce a feature in the roadmap but try to
> upstream it may cause that feature get less priority.
>
>
I see. thanks.
>> Thanks
>> Lijun Ou
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Lijun Ou
>>>>>
>>>>> 20.11 retrospective
>>>>> -------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> (I tried to summarize as best as I can, please free to correct/add
>>>>> when needed)
>>>>>
>>>>> * What went well
>>>>> * Managed to get out this very big release on time
>>>>> * Was more precise with dates
>>>>> * Expectations on features were more clear in this release
>>>>> * Good co-working between maintainers
>>>>> * Communication was better, project become more resilient
>>>>> * Akhil commented last minute stress was less
>>>>> * Major gcc distribution didn't cause disruption this time
>>>>> * LTS is doing good job overall
>>>>> * Thanks to Luca and Kevin for their work there
>>>>>
>>>>> * Things to improve
>>>>> * next-net is busy, %60+ of the commits coming from next-net,
>>>>> would be good to get more help, options to improve
>>>>> * Add a co-maintainer in that level
>>>>> * Andrew (backup maintainer) is great candidate if he can
>>>>> spare time
>>>>> He is already helping on reviews
>>>>> * He already covered during release when Ferruh is on holiday
>>>>> * Testpmd maintainership is not working fine, find maintainers
>>>>> for it
>>>>> * Should we add more vendor trees?
>>>>> * Huawei is contributing more, should it have a vendor
>>>>> sub-tree?
>>>>> * Huawei is being good citizen mostly
>>>>> * CI can be improved
>>>>> * Top level Thomas/David may felt the last minute stress more
>>>>> this time
>>>>> * Pachwork update by Jerin, to add reviewer column may help
>>>>> * This seems not exactly matching patchwork intention of
>>>>> using delegate
>>>>> field
>>>>> * Need to work on how to upstream this improvement
>>>>> * It is causing more problem when expectation is not clear
>>>>> from vendors
>>>>> * Security issues
>>>>> * They didn't work very well, the busy release is affecting it
>>>>> * Good thing is there is a well defined process, needs
>>>>> resource to execute
>>>>> * Can help to allocate separate resource for it
>>>>> * A technical project manager can do it, doesn't have to
>>>>> be developer
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> LTS
>>>>> ---
>>>>>
>>>>> * v19.11.6-rc1 is out, please test
>>>>> *
>>>>> http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/20201203093856.299103-1-luca.boccassi@gmail.com/
>>>>>
>>>>> * Target release date is 17 December
>>>>>
>>>>> * v18.11.10 work is going on
>>>>> * waiting for backports, request emails sent
>>>>> * -rc1 is planned before holidays
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> OvS
>>>>> ---
>>>>>
>>>>> * Second version of patch to switch DPDK 20.11 is sent, please review
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Opens
>>>>> -----
>>>>>
>>>>> * Asaf shared a draft release process documentation
>>>>> * It will be sent as documentation patch for community review,
>>>>> after initial review
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> DPDK Release Status Meetings
>>>>> ============================
>>>>>
>>>>> The DPDK Release Status Meeting is intended for DPDK Committers to
>>>>> discuss the
>>>>> status of the master tree and sub-trees, and for project managers
>>>>> to track
>>>>> progress or milestone dates.
>>>>>
>>>>> The meeting occurs on every Thursdays at 8:30 UTC. on
>>>>> https://meet.jit.si/DPDK
>>>>>
>>>>> If you wish to attend just send an email to
>>>>> "John McNamara <john.mcnamara@intel.com>" for the invite.
>>>>> .
>>>>>
>>>
>>> .
>>>
>
> .
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2020-12-07 14:48 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2020-12-03 11:51 [dpdk-dev] DPDK Release Status Meeting 3/12/2020 Ferruh Yigit
2020-12-07 11:54 ` oulijun
2020-12-07 12:31 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-12-07 13:03 ` oulijun
2020-12-07 13:59 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-12-07 14:48 ` oulijun
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).